Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 76 to 85 of 85
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    That makes more sense. I don't understand the laws that take court options away.
    I would assume religious fanatic and/or poorly written laws exploited by prosecutors.

    Or to hid the **** farms...

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    97,881
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I actually think the romeo and juliet laws that let a couple be together over that arbitrary age line makes some sense. The idea that a couple of 17 year olds can legally have sex all day every day, then one turns 18 and it's a felony for a week until the other one turns 18 too. That said, a 10 year spread seems WAY too far. I think most places it's less than 2 years and the youngest is 15.

    If I understood your post, you are saying that a 24 year old can legally be with a 14 year old? That seems way too far. Where does nasty live?
    From what I read, California gives you ten years and the minimum is 14. The law has been that way for at least 40 year (but I don't know exactly how long). As I understand it, they recently changed the law to say that oral and anal sex (I think someone posted this already, but I'm not certain). Prior to that clarification, anal sex wouldn't have been prohibited, so in their someone could have engaged in that with someone between 14-18 at any age legally.

    I get what you're saying about both sides being 17 and it being legal but then one side becomes 18 and suddenly it's illegal. But since I don't know how to write the law so it adequately covers the girl, I would defer to being "over protective" in the law than not enough.
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,552
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    From what I read, California gives you ten years and the minimum is 14. The law has been that way for at least 40 year (but I don't know exactly how long). As I understand it, they recently changed the law to say that oral and anal sex (I think someone posted this already, but I'm not certain). Prior to that clarification, anal sex wouldn't have been prohibited, so in their someone could have engaged in that with someone between 14-18 at any age legally.

    I get what you're saying about both sides being 17 and it being legal but then one side becomes 18 and suddenly it's illegal. But since I don't know how to write the law so it adequately covers the girl, I would defer to being "over protective" in the law than not enough.
    Kind of.

    1. No. Anal sex was still be illegal. But there was no no court discretion. So if a 17 and 18 year old gay couple had sex the 18 year old would automatically be charged with a felony and made to register as a sex offender.

    2. To clarify contrary to what most people think, statutory rape is sex with a minor. So if two 15 year olds have sex they can both be charged with statutory rape. And again if it was a gay couple. They could both be looking at felonies and registering as sex offenders.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    38,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    If I understood your post, you are saying that a 24 year old can legally be with a 14 year old? That seems way too far. Where does nasty live?
    lol, that's like my grandparents.

    What's wrong with that?

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  5. #80
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    58,464
    Here we go again!

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,152
    Quote Originally Posted by MRSpock View Post
    I would assume religious fanatic and/or poorly written laws exploited by prosecutors.

    Or to hid the **** farms...
    I think they are often for politicians to show they are "tough on crime".

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,152
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    From what I read, California gives you ten years and the minimum is 14. The law has been that way for at least 40 year (but I don't know exactly how long). As I understand it, they recently changed the law to say that oral and anal sex (I think someone posted this already, but I'm not certain). Prior to that clarification, anal sex wouldn't have been prohibited, so in their someone could have engaged in that with someone between 14-18 at any age legally.

    I get what you're saying about both sides being 17 and it being legal but then one side becomes 18 and suddenly it's illegal. But since I don't know how to write the law so it adequately covers the girl, I would defer to being "over protective" in the law than not enough.
    The problem with "over protective" laws is that they tend to screw people who they shouldn't. And why do you assume the girl is the one who needs to be covered?

    Sex crime registers don't work to do much more than ruin the lives of the people on them. We've got a whole lot of laws that over punish and under deliver.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    97,881
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    The problem with "over protective" laws is that they tend to screw people who they shouldn't. And why do you assume the girl is the one who needs to be covered?

    Sex crime registers don't work to do much more than ruin the lives of the people on them. We've got a whole lot of laws that over punish and under deliver.
    I assume that it's the girl because that's almost always how it goes. There are cases where the boy is the one who needs protecting but those cases are few and far between. The law is written in a way that is unisex. It covers all four possibilities. An overage girl and an underage boy, an overage girl and an under age girl, an overage boy and an underage boy, and an overage boy and an underage girl. The last one is the most common so it is how I've talked about the situation.
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    97,881
    Can someone explain to me how Lauren Boebert and Margorie Taylor Greeneís Aryan caucus missed their buddy Matt Gaetzís **** ring?

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    97,881
    Is Matt Gaetz pushing to be the one to investigate the children under the Florida bill banning transgender athletes? Seems right up his **** alley to want to investigate these young children's genitals.
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •